Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1887-03-01
seedlings. He asked that not to be laid of

caedirgs. He asked that not to be laid of
! by he Attorney-feneEal without some
law or precedent, Claiming the attorney
could not answer the law here laid
dJwn. APpesling TO the House, he asked
| upon what would hey base their jIdg-
ment, without snv facts or the testimony
! before them. He claimed that there
were only five men in the House who
knew anything about it, aud they
we're the special committee. The
evidence they had head vas
purely hearsay evidence, which was no
evidence IN matters Of his kind. Gad even
! If the Hoase would DE willing to take the
evidence Of their own special committee,
Wnal would the Senate do when the c,stter
came before them who neither had colu-
2iLtee or official knowledge OF those yco-
ceetingS which the constitution for5idS
and the laws condemn. Major Walton
thea elaborated on the facts aud epp.iet
the Jaw 10 the state OF fActs as he saw
them. In this connection be quoted from
a decision IN the Tnirty-siXsh
Texas where Judge was reversed
for the very act thG5 Judge Willis
was accused of dUiug and
that wss interfering with the prerogative
of the jurors. After taking up several
points in the charges he dwelt specially
upon the charge that Q: Il. Nelson Was
tried in his defense. He read q case in
the Fifteenth Court OF Appeals, in an az
gravated assault case, where man was
tried in his absence, and Notwithstanding
part of the punishment was imprison-
ment, the Appellate court sustained the
conviction. In conclusion he ssid that in
view of all the charges and the proof to
sustain them, Judge Willis stood ont be-
fore them without any convincing evil
dence of his guilt.
At the close of Major Waiton's argu-
ment, the uOuse adj iurned until 8o'clUck
p. M, when Attorney General Hogg be-
gan the argument on behalf of the prose-
cution. He sand when he took charge of
the attorney-generals office he found the
ma ter involved in this prosecution, anu
ne proposed to do his duty in prOsecnt-
ing the charges of corruption against
Judge Frank Willis, bequeathed by his
predecessor in Office. He reviewed the
positions taken by eac1 of the defendants
counsel in their line of argument. He
said he resp. Cted the Fourteenth Legis
Iature, to which Major Walton so
elaborately referred, but that Legislature
was in too much of q bury to formulate !
any set of rules to which we could lock as
q precedent, with that confidence shat
would nd this Legislature. He then
read ths constitutional provision granting !
the power to the Legislature to act. lie
said the proceedings now before the
House were more deliberate taen the |
legislative rules of 1874. They were not !
so speedy snd SO arbitrary to the defend |
ant. He then took up the position OF the |
defense, relative 10 the juuge's refusal to |
tak9 action TO stop the trials. Ike le-
viewed the evidence before published In |
The GAZETTE, and drew the conclusion !
that it was impossible for Judge Willis 10 !
have viewed the fGrcical trials without |
knowing that there was something wrolg, |
and as he ws5 the supreme officer |
that court could not have proceeded !
without his presence or consent. TIE !
places of the District Attorney, the |
Sheriff or the jurors cOuld be supplied |
by the court, but they could not have
proceeded without the consent oE the |
Judge presiding. Ii Judge Willis could |
nave done NJ mere, ne could at ieaS- have
refused to give mis- sanction to those cor
rupt proceedings. He compared the
p sitiOn OF JGdge Willis before the House
f Representatives with the position of
" Il. NFison before Judge Willis court,
indicted, tried and acquitted in his abb
sence. Referring to Goodnight, he said
that he K, pit Judge Willis from resig2ing
and the CattIemen mere said they were
here to support Judge Willis in his
trial He asked the members if
they had heard of the lobby work
Ing in the interests OF the defendant,
il some of them had not been offered free
tickets to show; if smooth talking
gentleman had not approached then and
talked of the purity of the defendant He
asked that il in the face of all this they
could >ay Judge Willis was an example
of the purity OF the judiciary OF the state
of Texas?
The House then adjourned until $50
tomorrow when the Attorney-General
will resume his argument.